The United States Supreme Court is leaking like a sieve.
It started with the leak of Justice Alito’s draft opinion overturning Roe v. Wade, believed to be a majority opinion at least as of early February 2022. That unleashed a firestrom of leftwing protest (which likely was the plan), but also plenty of speculation as to the culprit.
Most of the speculation, some of which has been highly irresponsible in naming possible names based on profiles, has centered on Supreme Court law clerks.
Now we have leaks about the leak investigation. CNN reports that law clerks are in the sights of investigators, with personal phone records being requsted as well as clerks being asked to sign affidavits:
Supreme Court officials are escalating their search for the source of the leaked draft opinion that would overturn Roe v. Wade, taking steps to require law clerks to provide cell phone records and sign affidavits, three sources with knowledge of the efforts have told CNN.Some clerks are apparently so alarmed over the moves, particularly the sudden requests for private cell data, that they have begun exploring whether to hire outside counsel.The court’s moves are unprecedented and the most striking development to date in the investigation into who might have provided Politico with the draft opinion it published on May 2. The probe has intensified the already high tensions at the Supreme Court, where the conservative majority is poised to roll back a half-century of abortion rights and privacy protections.Chief Justice John Roberts met with law clerks as a group after the breach, CNN has learned, but it is not known whether any systematic individual interviews have occurred….It is not known if court officials are asking employees who are part of the permanent staff, beyond the one-year law clerks, for their phone records.
So, there’s not a lot of specifics in the CNN report, but the logical place to start would be those closest to the opinion writing process — the clerks — and work your way out. It also makes sense to put people under oath, which raises the stakes enormously for a perp, converting what may be a breach of trust into a crime.
Prof. Jonathan Turley notes:
The affidavit may be a greater concern for the leaker. After all, the leaker may have wisely avoided using the cellphone or creating digital tracks. The affidavit is a sworn statement to federal investigators. If false, it would establish that a federal crime has been committed. Under 18 U.S.C. 1001, it is a federal crime to knowingly and willfully make a materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the United States. While there were possible criminal claims that could have been brought based on the leak, this makes such criminality clear and undeniable.That would mean that any doubt would be removed for the leaker. If he or she were to go public or be uncovered in the future, there would be a risk of not simply disbarment but criminal prosecution. The leaker may expect that they will be lionized for this effort in the media, though that is more likely if it was a liberal rather than a conservative leaker. This could frustrate such plans. Frankly, I am surprised that such affidavits were not required in the first week.
Maybe they were required the first week. We don’t know. Maybe John Roberts knows who done it, and is letting he/she/them panic to further betray the trail and see how high and wide the leak conspiracy ran. While there are claims that the FBI has not been asked to help, how do we know that is still true?
The probe is turning the court inside out – which of course was one of the goals IF as is likely the leaker was someone upset with the Alito/Majority opinion. The goal would have been not only to create a pretext for protest to pressure the Justices, but also do damage the court irreparably. What progressives cannot control, they must destroy, and SCOTUS no longer is something progressives can control.
CLICK HERE FOR FULL VERSION OF THIS STORY